Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences 2010 Toyota Prius Prices Paid and Buying Experiences
272 messages, Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 7:17 PM
You are in the Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences Forum. Your Hosts are car_man & kyfdx
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: felt (Jun 13, 2009 3:56 pm) I've only had one fill-up and the calculated mileage based upon trip meter distance and fuel fill-up was 52.3 MPG. But that was the 'dealer' tank and I've always found them to be suspect. This next tank will be trustable because I filled the tank. I've got the A tripmeter set to record this tank. I normally use the B tripmeter for specific tests:  So which do you think is most accurate, fuel receipt and tripmeter miles or the indicated MPG? ">Why? Bob Wilson
|
|
|
Replying to: bwilson4web (Jun 14, 2009 1:48 pm) I suspect more time will be required for you to determine the accuracy of the indicated "mpg. "I have a Dodge truck, and the indicated efficiency is about 4 mpg optomistic. I was wondering how accurate the Prius indicated mpg is? After a few more fill-ups, please come back and let us know how it is going. 52.3 is certainly wonderful , and few would complain over that.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: felt (Jun 15, 2009 7:26 am) It might be faster if you scan some of the Prius forums like PriusChat.com. I've seen periodic threads about multifunction display (MFD) versus calculated tank-odometer accuracy. I've never joined them because: 1) I record mileage using pump quantity and trip meter distance. 2) I use MFD for short distance, performance tests and usually an A-B-A series My impression from these discussions is the the relative differences have been in the 1-2% range so it never really interested me. I'm still on the second tank in the ZVW30 and this is my wife's car. My commuting car is a 2003 Prius, NHW11. I only get to borrow my wife's car when running weekend errands or bringing it in for show at work. The reason this makes sense is the NHW11 has 120,000 miles and counting. The ZVW30 has about 900 miles. A year from now, the NHW11 will have 140,000 miles ... and then more. I'm getting 52.1 MPG (a little more now that summer has arrived) so there is no real savings using my wife's car. And when the 'wheels fall off' of the NHW11, who cares? Bob Wilson |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: felt (Jun 15, 2009 7:26 am) I've been trying to figure out why you are curious about the relative accuracy of tanks/distance versus the MFD mileage display when it hit me. We hadn't discussed the effect of the fuel bladder in the 2001-2009 Prius that is no longer in the 2010 Prius. These earlier Prius have a flexible bladder in the tank that often does not expand to the full tank size when filling up. This can lead to as much as 1-2 gallons of unusable capacity. Yet the driver can do a short hop, say 5 miles and add this extra gas. Most don't but it leads to inaccurate "per tank" calculations:  You can see my full record at myhybridcar. Now these individual tank variations disappear as the number of tanks increase:  The larger, cumulative quantity of fuel burned means a 1-2 gallon error becomes insignificant. Now you might notice that my per fill-up variation evened out about two years after I got my NHW11. That year I started testing different brands of gasoline to determine which gave better mileage performance. Part of the protocol was to run the tank dry, which I did about three dozen times. This had a side effect of recalibrating the fuel gauge and apparently reseating the bladder. Since then, the per fill-up variation and accuracy of my fuel gauge appears to be better (or less bad.) So when I report 52.1 MPG for my 2003 Prius, it is based upon fuel receipts divided by mileage from the trip meter. I do calibrate the tires and adjust for true distance since tire wear does change the accuracy. How about you? Do you also calibrate your tires and tripmeter? Using GPS, I know my 2010 indicates 1 mph higher than true speed at 50+ mph. However, the trip meter average speed is dead on accurate.">link title Bob Wilson |
|
|
Replying to: bwilson4web (Jun 16, 2009 1:45 am) You mentioned running the tank dry to re-calibrate the electronics. On my truck there is a reset button. How does the 2010 reset? Thanks for the info. I have a 2010 on "order." I am afraid , however, it may be quite a ways off before I take delivery. Small dealer and (I suspect) a low allocation.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: felt (Jun 16, 2009 6:07 am) I haven't done and don't plan on doing a hard study of the gallons/mile versus the indicated MPG. The reason is it takes too long! It is my wife's car and until we go on a trip, we won't be burning enough fuel to do an accurate study. I'm confident the indicated MPG is fairly accurate in my 2003 Prius, NHW11. I've used it to plot mph vs MPG and get reproducible results in past, cross country travels. The bladder has been a 'pain in the ass' unless you know how to ignore the worst aspects. The one caution is when the fuel indicator begins to flash in my 03, I always assume there is only 25 miles remaining although I've usually gone 65-75 miles. As for the 2010, one Japanese driver reported 1.8 gallons remaining but I found 2.1 in my first test. But I understand we also have different size tanks (theirs is reported to be larger.) Bob Wilson
|
|
|
Replying to: bwilson4web (Jun 16, 2009 1:45 am) If that is correct, (you adjust your calculations for tire wear) I'll assume you've thought this out well so it makes me think harder. My initial thought was that depending upon the air pressure and the tire flexing that the true radius or diameter of a tire under load on a car is different than the specs listed in the tire literature, or even what you would measure and that you would have an error. However for the purposes of measuring the true travel distance, the circumference is what's important regardless of how low the tire pressure is. Thanks for making me think a little harder. So do you actually measure the tire wear? Do you simply do a GPS recalbration on a regular schedule? Just curious since you seem to take this a step or two beyond anything I've ever attempted. |
|
|
Replying to: bwilson4web (Jun 16, 2009 9:10 am) That seems to be the Toyota standard as my TCH and HH have about the same "reserve". |
|
Let's stick to pricing in this discussion.. A lot of other Prius discussions to talk about fuel mileage...
|
|
|
I am trying to purchase the 2010 prius with package IV with Navigation and Satellite Radio. The price seems to be somewhere around 28,350. I am looking for 36 month lease with 15,000 miles and 2000/down. Has anyone leased a 2010 with these specs? If so what is your monthly? I have been told by North Hollywood Toyota that they are selling their Prius' for 7,500 over invoice? Does anyone have any numbers they can share?
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Prices Paid: Buying & Leasing Experiences 2010 Toyota Prius Prices Paid and Buying Experiences
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Toyota Prius
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
